Re: [bess] Alia Atlas' Yes on draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community-09: (with COMMENT)

["Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alia,

Yeah, the "this implies" follows from the previous sentence that contains a "SHOULD NOT" and so this sentence is a descriptive annotation to the previous sentence.
The subsequence sentence is back into the world of normative text.

A

> -----Original Message-----
> From: iesg [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Alia Atlas
> Sent: 03 February 2015 16:48
> To: The IESG
> Cc: [e-mail]; bess-
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Alia Atlas' Yes on draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community-09: (with
> COMMENT)
> 
> Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community-09: Yes
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In Sec 2,2, it says:
> "This implies that when propagating routes into a VRF,
>    the ACCEPT_OWN community should not be propagated.  Likewise, if a
>    route carrying the ACCEPT_OWN community is received in an address
>    family which does not allow the source VRF to be looked up, the
>    ACCEPT_OWN community MUST be discarded."
> 
> In the first sentence above, it seems like the "should not" should be
> either "SHOULD NOT"
> or "MUST NOT".  Is there a reason that the text is descriptive instead of
> normative?